Asylum Seekers

Lord Laird: To ask Her Majesty’s Government how many asylum seekers arriving in the United Kingdom in the last five year have been noted as having been first registered in the Republic of Ireland; what is their policy towards such asylum seekers; and whether the number is increasing.

Lord Taylor of Holbeach: Over the last five years the total number of asylum seekers in the United Kingdom who were previously registered in Ireland, either as asylum seekers or illegal entrants, is 516. Details are given in the table below. The recorded figures do not show separate totals for asylum seekers and illegal entrants. This data is sourced from UK Visas and Immigration's management information system, which is not quality assured under National Statistics protocols and is subject to change due to internal data quality statistics and should be treated as provisional.
	
		
			 Year Count 
			 2008 60 
			 2009 103 
			 2010 102 
			 2011 135 
			 2012 116 
			 Total 516 
		
	
	This shows a peak of onward migration from Ireland in 2011 and a decline in 2012.
	Where Ireland is responsible under the terms of the Dublin Regulation, (Council Regulation (EC) No.343/2003), for examining an application for asylum, UK Visas and Immigration will seek to remove that applicant to Ireland.

Asylum Seekers

Lord Hylton: To ask Her Majesty’s Government what assessment they have made of the comments by the Equality and Human Rights Commission in its submission to the Seventh Periodic Report of the United Kingdom to the United Nations Committee on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women suggesting (1) that the United Kingdom is failing to recognise the needs of asylum-seeking women fleeing gender-based violence, and (2) that there is a lack of adequate provision in detention centres for pregnant or lactating women.

Lord Taylor of Holbeach: The Government has noted the comments made by the Equality and Human Rights Commission (EHRC).
	The Government is committed to improving levels of gender sensitivity in the UK asylum system and has made great progress in recent years,
	including putting in place new enhanced guidance, supported by high quality training for all decision-makers.
	The Government is working on a number of other initiatives in light of the far reaching commitments it made in the Government's Violence Against Women and Girls Action Plan, including a pilot of referrals of victims of sexual and gender based violence to the appropriate services, and regular audits of decisions in gender-based cases.
	The EHRC's submission to the Seventh Periodic Report of the United Kingdom to the United Nations Committee on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women does not appear to make direct criticism of the provision in detention centres for pregnant or lactating women. In any case, all immigration removal centres (IRCs) and pre-departure accommodation (PDA) have primary healthcare facilities equivalent to those available to women in the community. Where it becomes apparent that a woman is pregnant or lactating, the on-site healthcare team will make appropriate arrangements for her care. Secondary and tertiary healthcare services are provided by the local Primary Care Trust (PCT). IRC and PDA healthcare facilities make referrals to the local PCT in the same way in which a GP surgery in the community would, including for midwifery services.

Banks: Co-operative Bank

Lord Myners: To ask Her Majesty’s Government whether, in matters concerning the Co-operative Bank, they or the Prudential Regulatory Authority regard the Co-operative Wholesale Services or Co-operative Financial Services to be “the qualifying parent undertaking”; and whether the power to issue directions is limited to Co-operative Financial Services.
	To ask Her Majesty’s Government whether they plan to issue directions to Co-operative Wholesale Services to recapitalise fully the Co-operative Bank without recourse to the taxpayer or impairment of retail investor claims in the event that the required support from holders of 75 per cent of each class of bond and preference share is not forthcoming.
	To ask Her Majesty’s Government what actions, if any, they have taken or are taking to ensure that retail investors in debt instruments issued by the Co-operative Bank are professionally advised by parties not appointed by Co-operative Wholesale Services or its subsidiaries or in receipt of payment or benefits from Co-operative Wholesale Services and its subsidiaries.
	To ask Her Majesty’s Government whether Co-operative Financial Services falls within the resolution group of the Co-operative Bank; and whether actions are being taken to ensure that funds are not transferred from Co-operative Financial Services to the Co-operative Wholesale Society to the disadvantage of creditors to the Bank.
	To ask Her Majesty’s Government what assessment they have made of whether the encumbrance of assets of the Co-operative Bank to provide security for funding by other banks may be weakening the covenant available to support the claims of retail savers and depositors.

Lord Deighton: “Co-operative Financial Services” is the trading name of Co-operative Banking Group Ltd. As set out in my previous answer to the Noble Lord in response to his questions tabled 10 October, Co-operative Banking Group Ltd owns Co-operative Bank PLC, and is a qualifying parent undertaking in relation to the Co-operative Bank PLC under the Financial Services and Markets Act 2000 (FSMA).
	The Government can confirm that there is no firm called “Co-operative Wholesale Services” that could be considered a qualifying parent undertaking in relation to the Co-operative Bank PLC.
	For the purposes of this answer, it is assumed that “Co-operative Wholesale Services” refers to the Co-operative Group Ltd. Co-operative Group Ltd owns Co-operative Banking Group Ltd, and is the parent undertaking at the head of the group. Co-operative Group Ltd is not a qualifying parent undertaking, either in relation to the Co-operative Bank PLC or any other firm.
	Information about the structure of the Co-operative Group is included in the Group's 2012 annual report, which is available from www.co-operative.coop/Corporate/PDFs/Annual-Report/2012/TCG_AnnuaI-Report-2012.pdf.
	As I set out in my previous answer, the PRA has powers under 192A to 192I of FSMA to direct qualifying parent undertakings. The PRA's policy statement on the use of these powers is available from the Bank of England website, http://www.bankofengland.co.uk/publications/Documents/other/pra/powerdirection.pdf. These powers are available in relation to Co-operative Banking Group Ltd, but not in relation to the Co-operative Group Ltd.
	The PRA may exercise its power of direction in respect of Co-operative Banking Group Ltd if the PRA considers that it is desirable to give the direction in order to advance any of its objectives, including the PRA's general objective of promoting the safety and soundness of PRA-authorised firms or to enable effective consolidated supervision of a group. In addition, the PRA would need to act in accordance with the general principles of public and human rights law. It is, however, important to bear in mind that Co-operative Group Ltd not Co-operative Banking Group Ltd controls the main resources of the group. As set out above, the PRA has powers under 192A to 1921 of FSMA to direct qualifying parent undertakings.
	Regarding the provision of independent advice to investors in the Co-operative Bank affected by the Co-op's liability management exercise, I refer the Noble Lord to my previous answer to his question on this subject of 30 July 2013, and the subsequent letter to him from Martin Wheatley, Chief Executive of the PRA, a copy of which has been placed the libraries of both Houses.
	It is unclear what is meant by “the resolution group of the Co-operative Bank ”. It may be that the purpose of the question is to identify which of the companies in the Co-operative Group could in principle be subject to the special resolution regime (SRR), as well as the Co-operative Bank itself.
	The Government has powers, under section 84 of the Banking Act 2009, to take a parent undertaking of a bank into temporary public ownership, provided that the legal test set out in the Act is met. Condition 1 is that the PRA are satisfied that the general conditions for the exercise of a stabilisation power set out in section 7 are met in respect of the bank; Condition 2 is that the Treasury are satisfied that the action is necessary to resolve or reduce a serious threat to the financial stability; or that it is necessary to protect the public interest, where the Treasury have provided financial assistance. As indicated above, both Co-operative Group Ltd and Co-operative Banking Group Ltd are parent undertakings of the Co-operative Bank PLC.
	As for other group companies: provisions in the Financial Services Act 2012 extend Banking Act 2009 resolution powers to group companies. A consultation on the statutory instruments that will implement those provisions is currently open. The consultation document is available at: https://www.gov.uk/government/ consultations/secondary-legislation-for-non-bank-resolution-regimes.
	Finally, it is the role of the PRA to carry out prudential assessments of firms within its remit, including assessment of asset encumbrance. The PRA operates independently of Government. The Government has frequent discussions with the PRA, at Ministerial and official level, about the full range of firms and across a range of issues. It would not be appropriate to comment on the details of discussions about individual firms. The Government notes that under EU law the PRA may not publicly disclose firm specific regulatory data.

Banks: Co-operative Bank

Lord Myners: To ask Her Majesty’s Government whether they or the regulators are monitoring the change of the fair-value versus carrying-value (after provisions) delta on the customer loan book of the Co-operative Bank; and whether they and the regulators continue to have confidence in the liability management proposals put forward for that bank.

Lord Deighton: The PRA is responsible for the prudential supervision of all firms within its remit, which includes consideration of factors that may affect the valuation of assets. The Government has frequent discussions with both regulators, at Ministerial and official level, about the full range of firms and across a range of issues. It would not be appropriate to comment on the details of discussions about individual firms.

Banks: Co-operative Bank

Lord Myners: To ask Her Majesty’s Government whether they or the regulators are investigating whether the annual report and accounts of the Co-operative Bank complied with going concern tests; and whether the failure to
	disclose instructions from the Bank of England or the Financial Services Authority to increase capital constituted a breach of Listing Requirements.

Lord Deighton: Compliance with disclosure and reporting obligations is a matter for the Financial Conduct Authority (FCA) in its capacity as the UK Listing Authority (UKLA). This question has therefore been passed to the FCA, who will reply to the Noble Lord directly by letter. A copy of the response will be laid in the libraries of both Houses.

Benefits: Motability Scheme

Lord Alton of Liverpool: To ask Her Majesty’s Government how much funding is being set aside to assist Motability users who will lose their vehicles because of the change from disability living allowance to personal independence payments; what the average payment will be; whether they consider it sufficient to purchase and run a vehicle in the future; and what funds will be available to pay for adaptations such as hand controls, wheelchair accessibility and other adaptations.
	To ask Her Majesty’s Government what help they will make available, comparable to that which will be provided by Motability, (1) to customers who will lose their previous Motability support, and (2) to disabled people who are not Motability users; and how many people are estimated to fall into those categories.
	To ask Her Majesty’s Government what is their estimate of the number of people who use a Motability vehicle who will fail to qualify for the personal independence payment enhanced rate and will therefore have to surrender their Motability vehicle; and when they expect vehicle sequestrations and recoveries to begin.
	To ask Her Majesty’s Government how many people who currently receive the higher rate of disability living allowance use Motability; how many do not; how many of those they estimate are unlikely to qualify for the personal independence payment; and what provision is being made for such people.

Lord Freud: We have worked closely with the Motability charity to ensure they are well placed to manage the impact on Motability users of the introduction and roll out of Personal Independence Payment (PIP). We have also talked to them to see what support the charity could offer claimants who may lose their eligibility for a Motability vehicle following PIP reassessment.
	I welcome the one-off transitional package of support that Motability recently announced and in particular their decision to give most claimants leaving the Scheme £2,000. This will enable many claimants to continue to meet their mobility needs by purchasing a used car.
	In addition to this, the Government will allow payment of Disability Living Allowance (DLA) to continue for a further four weeks after a decision on PIP is made. Motability have also confirmed that they will allow people to keep their car for a further three weeks after payments of DLA stop, which means claimants will be able to retain use of their car for nearly two months.
	Further details of their transitional support package, including what help will be available for people who require adaptations, can be obtained from Motability. The charity’s address is:, Motability, Warwick House, Royden Road, Harlow, Essex CM19 SPX.
	As at February 20132 , there were 1,791,730 recipients of the higher rate mobility component of DLA. At September 2013, approximately a third of higher rate mobility component recipients had chosen to join the Motability Scheme and two thirds had not.
	By October 2015, it is estimated that 140,000 individuals currently receiving DLA higher rate mobility component will not receive the enhanced rate of the PIP equivalent. This information is not broken down into those on higher rate mobility who chose to use their benefit to lease a Motability vehicle and those who chose not to do so.
	We are continuing to work closely with Motability to understand what impact PIP might have on their customer numbers. Natural reassessment of DLA recipients to PIP started on a controlled basis on 28 October 2013 and it is too early to form a reliable estimate from live running of the number of DLA recipients who are Motability users who will not qualify for PIP.
	2
	Latest available DWP data

Borders, Immigration and Citizenship Act 2009

Lord Laird: To ask Her Majesty’s Government whether they are appealing the decision of 14 August in the Northern Ireland High Court in the matter of an application by ALJ and A, B and C to quash a removal decision; who represented which government department; and whether they intend to amend section 53 of the Borders, Immigration and Citizenship Act 2009 as it relates to Article 3(2) of the European Union Dublin II Regulation and children.

Lord Taylor of Holbeach: The Secretary of State for the Home Department was represented in the case of ALJ and A, B and C by Queen's Counsel, instructed on her behalf by the Crown Solicitor's Office, Belfast.
	The Secretary of State is not appealing against the Court's decision nor does she intend to amend either section 53 of the Borders, Immigration and Citizenship Act 2009 or section 55 of the same Act, the latter being specifically referred to in the judgment regarding the need to safeguard and promote the welfare of children.

Burma

Baroness Nye: To ask Her Majesty’s Government whether funding has been provided by the Department for International Development to assist with rehabilitation through counselling and other services for former political prisoners in Burma.

Baroness Northover: DFID has not provided funding for rehabilitation and counselling services for former political prisoners in Burma. The UK, however, continues to provide assistance through the British Council to help former political prisoners to develop the necessary skills, knowledge and confidence, including language skills, to take an active and effective role in the political process, perform more effectively within their organisations and communities, and engage with the diplomatic and international business community.

Burma

Baroness Kinnock of Holyhead: To ask Her Majesty’s Government how much consultation the Department for International Development is currently undertaking with Burmese civil society.

Baroness Northover: DFID consults widely with civil society across our portfolio of work, including on health, education and other sectors. We also have a specific Civil Society Strengthening Programme to help promote social and political change through engagement with civil society organisations.

Employment: Websites

Lord Clement-Jones: To ask Her Majesty’s Government what percentage of the total number of jobs currently on the Universal Jobmatch website are directly uploaded by employers.

Lord Freud: Based on the jobs advertised on the Universal Jobmatch service, the percentage of new jobs uploaded by employers as at 30 September 2013 was 52.3%.

Employment: Websites

Lord Clement-Jones: To ask Her Majesty’s Government what percentage of the total number of jobs currently on the Universal Jobmatch website originate from recruitment agencies on behalf of employers.

Lord Freud: Based on the jobs advertised on the Universal Jobmatch service, the percentage of jobs uploaded from recruitment agencies on behalf of
	employers as at 30 September 2013 was 47.7%. It is not possible to exclude from this figure recruitment agencies advertising their own vacancies.

Employment: Websites

Lord Clement-Jones: To ask Her Majesty’s Government how the Universal Jobmatch search facility matches job locations.

Lord Freud: Universal Jobmatch system that now use the postcode as the location indicator. This helps pinpoint the location of the seeker and the vacancy more specifically and greatly improves the search results.

Employment: Websites

Lord Clement-Jones: To ask Her Majesty’s Government how the Department for Work and Pensions assesses the accuracy of the Universal Jobmatch website feature that matches jobs to those who have registered, uploaded CVs and listed their skills.

Lord Freud: Universal Jobmatch uses 6Sense technology to enable jobseekers to see the jobs/opportunities most relevant to them. The search engine searches conceptually (so jobseekers don't have to type exact terms into the job title to obtain a match). Universal Jobmatch finds more job results from search criteria because results are not limited to the words you enter. Universal Jobmatch will find relevant jobs by matching the search criteria you enter and by matching words that are related to your search criteria. You'll get a wider range of search results that are also more relevant.
	We do not currently have a mechanism in place for routinely assessing job search accuracy. DWP is working with the Universal Jobmatch supplier on a timetable for prioritising and implementing improvements to the available MI, subject to funding.
	However, we do gather user insight and will act on any feedback relating to the accuracy of the matching feature.

Food: Food Banks

Lord Greaves: To ask Her Majesty’s Government whether they have made any assessment of the reasons for the increase reported by the Trussell Trust in the numbers of people provided with food by their food banks between April and September compared with the previous year; and whether they have made arrangements to have discussions with the Trust on that matter.

Lord Freud: Support provided by charities and the voluntary sector is entirely at their discretion. The Government does not monitor the usage of foodbanks and has no plans to do so.

Grenada

Baroness Kinnock of Holyhead: To ask Her Majesty’s Government what is their assessment of the government of Grenada’s suggestion that debt relief for that country should be agreed by all creditors including the International Monetary Fund, the World Bank, the Caribbean Development Bank and the United Kingdom.

Lord Deighton: For many years the UK has been at the forefront of international efforts to promote debt sustainability, including through our ongoing support for the IMF/World Bank Debt Sustainability Framework and the Heavily Indebted Poor Country Initiative.
	Discussions on the treatment of sovereign debt take place within the multilateral framework of the Paris Club, which operates on the basis of consensus and confidentiality. The Government does not provide information on Paris Club discussions.

Gypsies and Travellers

Lord Avebury: To ask Her Majesty’s Government which local authorities in London and the rest of England respectively, if any, have identified a suitable five-year supply of Traveller sites to meet their objectively assessed need for Traveller pitches, and have obtained the approval of an independent inspector for those plans following an examination in public.

Baroness Stowell of Beeston: As Ministers explained to the Noble Lord in the answer of 10 April 2013, Official Report, Column WA290, this information is not collected centrally. More broadly, 76% of local planning authorities in England now have a local plan at the publication stage or beyond.

Health: HIV/AIDS

Baroness Scotland of Asthal: To ask Her Majesty’s Government, further to the Written Answer by Baroness Northover on 16 October (WA 83–4), what new resources are being provided to improve HIV responses for men who have sex with men in countries that continue to criminalise same-sex sexual conduct; and how those resources affect prevention and treatment.
	To ask Her Majesty’s Government, further to the Written Answer by Baroness Northover on 16 October (WA 83–4), what support they are providing to men who have sex with men in Commonwealth countries, particularly in countries that criminalise same-sex sexual conduct.

Baroness Northover: The Minister of State for International Development, Rt Hon Alan Duncan MP announced in July 2012 up to £4 million to 2015 for the Robert Carr Civil Society Networks Fund.
	The Fund provides support to global and regional civil society networks that reach key populations affected by HIV, both in the Commonwealth and other countries that continue to criminalise same-sex conduct. The networks have the potential to deliver transformational change by influencing policy at the global and national level to enhance the quality and effectiveness of HIV prevention, treatment, care and support services without fear of stigma or discrimination.

Health: Mitochondrial Disease

Lord Alton of Liverpool: To ask Her Majesty’s Government, further to the Written Answer by Earl Howe on 14 October (WA 63–4), which physical and mental characteristics they consider to differ from those representative of health; what are the definitions of health and disease employed by the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority (HFEA) when making regulatory decisions; and whether the HFEA’s distinction between health and disease depends on presentation of symptoms or, if not, how mitochondrial disease is defined.
	To ask Her Majesty’s Government, further to the Written Answer by Earl Howe on 14 October (WA 63–4), whether germline mitochondrial DNA mutations that aggravate ageing and impair brain development, as described in the journal Nature (Volume 501, pages 412-15), would be recognised by the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority as mitochondrial disease.

Earl Howe: Mitochondrial diseases have some unique characteristics, both because of the way the disease is inherited from the mother and because mitochondria are so critical to cell and tissue function. Each individual affected will have different severity of symptoms because of different levels of functioning mitochondria within each cell and their location within the body. For that reason, it would be inappropriate to attempt to generalise on what conditions might be considered to differ from those representative of health.
	The Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority (HFEA) has advised that when making regulatory decisions the definitions it refers to are those contained in the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Act 1990, as amended. The HFEA has also advised that it has not made a distinction between health and disease.
	The Government is currently developing draft regulations, which will describe in more detail the proposed approach for regulating mitochondria donation treatment. The Government is planning to publish these, as part of a public consultation, shortly.

Health: Mitochondrial Disease

Lord Alton of Liverpool: To ask Her Majesty’s Government, further to the Written Answer by Earl Howe on 29 August (WA 359), what proportion of the DNA in a nucleus would need to be altered before they would regard it as genetic modification; whether the absolute number of nuclear genes to be altered would have to be more than 37 for it to be regarded as genetic modification; and whether replacement of all nuclear genes would therefore be regarded as genetic modification, and, if not, why not.

Earl Howe: While the Government recognises that the proposed mitochondrial donation techniques, to prevent the transfer of a serious mitochondrial disease from an affected mother to her child, will have an impact on future generations because they will not be expected to inherit the mitochondrial DNA disorder, this process is not genetic modification. The genes present in the donated mitochondria will not be altered nor will the nuclear DNA of the child's parents' egg or embryo that will be used in these procedures.

Human Trafficking

Lord Touhig: To ask Her Majesty’s Government what criteria they intend to use for categorising an individual as a suspected victim of human trafficking for the purposes of exempting that individual from proposals to regulate migrant access to health services.

Lord Taylor of Holbeach: No changes are planned to the existing arrangements: those who are identified as suspected victims of trafficking by the UK's competent authorities are entitled to access necessary health care and are exempt from NHS health care charges.

Human Trafficking

Lord Wigley: To ask Her Majesty’s Government how the responsibility for caring for children who have been trafficked and are resident in Wales is divided between the Welsh Government and the United Kingdom Government; and what aspects are reserved to the United Kingdom Government.

Lord Taylor of Holbeach: Whilst overall responsibility for child trafficking sits with the UK Government, responsibility for delivery of children's social care in Wales, including for children who have been trafficked, is a transferred responsibility for the Welsh Government.

Immigration

Lord Roberts of Llandudno: To ask Her Majesty’s Government, under their proposals for landlords to check tenants' immigration status, what provisions will be made for those legally resident in the United Kingdom, including United
	Kingdom citizens, who for any reason do not have the correct documentation to prove their citizenship.
	To ask Her Majesty’s Government, under their proposals for landlords to check tenants' immigration status, whether legislative provision will be made for people residing in the United Kingdom whose immigration status is legitimate but under consideration.
	To ask Her Majesty’s Government according to what criteria they will choose the region in which landlord checks on immigration status will be piloted.
	To ask Her Majesty’s Government what assessment they have made of a recent survey by the Residential Landlords Association concerning the performance of further documentary checks on proposed tenants in order to establish their immigration status.
	To ask Her Majesty’s Government, under their proposals for landlords to check tenants' immigration status, whether steps will be taken to ensure the compliance of landlords with data protection provisions regarding the handling of and saving of personal information.

Lord Taylor of Holbeach: The Government consulted on the landlords proposals in detail between July and August. Our response was published on 10 October.
	Having consulted closely with housing charities, local authorities and the private rented sector, we are proposing to allow tenants to use a broad range of commonly available documents, such as benefits letters, in addition to passports as a means of satisfying the required checks.
	For lawful migrants, the Government will allow those who are applying for an extension of leave to retain their biometric residence permit as evidence of lawful status; we will also provide a landlords checking service which will allow landlords to quickly confirm the immigration status of a prospective tenant without relevant documentation; foreign nationals who have live applications with the Home Office will also be able to obtain a verification certificate that they can use with landlords.
	The Bill allows for a phased implementation of the landlords checking requirement. The selection of an appropriate model or region is under consideration — relevant criteria would include the nature of the housing stock, size of the population, as well as the ability to establish a clear boundary.
	We understand that the Residential Landlords Association has conducted two surveys of their members in relation to these proposals. The first survey found many landlords opposed to or concerned by the proposals. A further survey of members undertaken in July and August, however, showed that the majority already check passports; nearly half seek evidence of employment and that a wide range of documents are seen by some landlords. The survey also showed that the majority of
	respondents, nearly 90 percent, agreed with the need for some form of checks on tenants, albeit largely in relation to creditworthiness.
	Landlords and their agents are already under a legal obligation to handle, store and dispose of personal consumer information sensibly and securely and are obliged to abide by the principles of the Data Protection Act 1998.

Immigration: Holding Facilities

Lord Ramsbotham: To ask Her Majesty’s Government when the rules governing short-term holding facilities will be published.

Lord Taylor of Holbeach: The draft Short-Term Holding Facility Rules have yet to be finalised and, as such, there is at present no fixed date for when they will be made.

Internet: Fraud

Lord Birt: To ask Her Majesty’s Government what plans they have to improve the collection of data about online fraud in order better to understand the scale and nature of offending, and their success in countering it.

Lord Taylor of Holbeach: Action Fraud is the single reporting portal for fraud, including financially motivated internet crime. The Office for National Statistics publishes offences recorded by Action Fraud, along with the Crime Survey for England and Wales, in the quarterly Police Recorded Crime bulletin. This will help to give a better understanding of the scale and nature of on-line crime.

Local Authorities: Revenue Support

Lord Greaves: To ask Her Majesty’s Government how much each principal local authority in England received in revenue support payments from central government funds in (1) the current year, and (2) each of the last four years, broken down by the category of funding.

Baroness Stowell of Beeston: Detail of Revenue Support Grant funding for local authorities in England is for 2013-14 available on our website at;
	www.local.communities.gov.uk/finance/1314/1314headamts.xls
	Detail of formula grant funding for previous years is also available on our site at;
	www.local.communities.gov.uk/finance/ssas.htm
	Revenue Support Grant and formula grant are unhypothecated block grants and it is therefore not possible to break them down by category of funding. From April 2013 the new business rates retention scheme also allows local authorities to retain a portion of business rates collected.

Malawi

Baroness Kinnock of Holyhead: To ask Her Majesty’s Government what assessment they have made of the Norwegian suspension of budget support to Malawi.

Baroness Northover: There has been no separate assessment of the Norwegian suspension of budget support to Malawi but DFID officials in Lilongwe are in close contact with all donor partners, including the Norwegians, who provide budget support. They are closely monitoring the current fraud revelations and the Government of Malawi's response, and are providing support to the on-going investigations. Meanwhile, DFID has delayed the majority of its financial aid payments to Malawi until it is clearer what action the Government is taking in response to the corruption scandal.

Migrant Workers

Lord Taylor of Warwick: To ask Her Majesty’s Government how the proportion of European Union migrants to the United Kingdom who have never worked is calculated.

Lord Wallace of Saltaire: The information requested falls within the responsibility of the UK Statistics Authority. I have asked the Authority to reply.
	Letter from Glen Watson, Director General for ONS, to Lord Taylor of Warwick, dated October 2013.
	As Director General for the Office for National Statistics (ONS), I have been asked to reply to your Parliamentary Question asking how the proportion of European Union migrants to the United Kingdom who have never worked is calculated. (HL2924)
	ONS has not calculated an official estimate of the proportion of European Union migrants to the United Kingdom who have never worked.
	If the statistic in question refers to the percentage of EU migrant jobseekers that have never worked in their country of residence, then this estimate was taken from figure 3.10 of the EU Commission report: ‘A fact finding analysis on the impact on the Member States' social security systems of the entitlements of non-active intra-EU migrants to special non-contributory cash benefits and healthcare granted on the basis of residence’. A link to this report is included below:
	http://ec.europa.eu/social/main.jsp?langId=en&catId=89&newsId=1980&further News=yes
	The source of the information on EU migrant jobseekers comes from the Labour Force Survey of each Member State, the results for which are made available by Eurostat, the statistical office of the European Union. As cited in the report, the estimate is calculated by the author(s) of the report using an approach that is not based upon any official ONS methodology.

Nationality, Immigration and Asylum Act 2002

Lord Avebury: To ask Her Majesty’s Government whether they will review the criteria used in deciding whether to designate a state under section 94 of the Nationality, Immigration and Asylum Act 2002, with particular reference to its treatment of lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender and intersex people.

Lord Taylor of Holbeach: The Government has no plans to change the current criteria used in deciding whether to designate a state under section 94 of the Nationality, Immigration and Asylum Act 2002.
	All countries designated under section 94(4) of the NIA Act 2002 have to meet a two part test in section 94(5), firstly that there is in general no serious risk of persecution of those entitled to reside in that State or part and secondly that removal to that state or part will not in general contravene the UKs obligations under the European Convention on Human Rights. Where a state is designated under section 94(4) asylum and human rights claims from nationals of that state are considered on their individual merits and certified if the claim is clearly unfounded. However, where the claim is not clearly unfounded it will not be certified.

NHS: Funding

Lord Hunt of Kings Heath: To ask Her Majesty’s Government what increases in allocations in real terms the NHS has received since May 2010.

Earl Howe: The Spending Review in October 2010 announced that health funding would increase by 0.1 % in real terms in each of the four years from 2011-12 to 2014-15. The Spending Round announced in June this year that health funding will again rise by 0.1% in real terms in 2015-16.

Parliaments: Costs

Lord Stoddart of Swindon: To ask Her Majesty’s Government what are the latest figures for the annual total costs, and cost per member, of (1) the House of Lords, (2) the House of Commons, and (3) the European Parliament.

Lord Deighton: The following table sets out the annual cost, number of members and average cost per member for the House of Commons, House of Lords and European Parliament.
	
		
			  Annual cost Number of members Expenditure per member 
			 House of Commons £392m 650 £0.60m 
			 House of Lords £87m 813-821 £0.11m 
			 European Parliament €1,555m 736 €2.11m 
			 - equivalent in £1 £1,318m  £1.79m 
		
	
	The figures for the House of Commons are taken from the House of Commons annual accounts 2012-13 (for both administrative and members' budgets) and the Independent Parliamentary Standards Authority annual accounts 2012-13.
	The House of Lords figures are for taken from the House of Lords Annual Accounts 2012-13.
	For the European Parliament figures are taken from the European Union Budget of 2011 Financial Report (the Financial Report for 2012 has not yet been published). The European Parliament increased from 736 members to 754 from 1 December 2011 . It has since increased again in 2013 to 766 members, but following the Parliamentary election of 2014 this will again reduce to 751.
	1
	Exchange rate December 2011 €1.18=£1.

Pensions

Lord Berkeley: To ask Her Majesty’s Government, further to the Written Answer by Baroness Kramer on 17 October (WA 105), what efforts are being made by Department for Transport officials to minimise the liability on the General Lighthouse Fund should the General Lighthouse Authorities decide to join the Principal Civil Service Pension Scheme.

Baroness Kramer: The costs associated with any organisation participating in the Principal Civil Service Pension Scheme are set out in Cabinet Office guidance at:
	http://resources.civilservice.gov.uk/wp-content/uploads/2013/01/EPN350.pdf
	Civil Service pension arrangements are being updated to reflect recent public sector pension reforms. These arrangements will be applied to the General Lighthouse Authorities.

Pensions

Lord Berkeley: To ask Her Majesty’s Government, further to the Written Answer by Baroness Kramer on 17 October (WA 105), what meetings have been held between (1) Ministers, and (2) officials, of HM Treasury and Ministers of the Department for Transport in 2013 in respect of the General Lighthouse Authorities joining the Principal Civil Service Pension Scheme.

Baroness Kramer: In common with a number of other organisations, Her Majesty's Treasury's Public Service Pensions Act 2013 enables the General Lighthouse Authorities to join the Principal Civil Service Pension Scheme. Officials across Government have met on a number of occasions to consider the issues arising.

Police: Ethnic Recruitment

Lord Condon: To ask Her Majesty’s Government what progress has been made in the last three years in recruiting police officers and police community support officers from an ethnic minority background.

Lord Taylor of Holbeach: The following table provided contains data on the percentage of Police Officers and Police Community Support Officers recruited to police forces in England and Wales in the last three years who are from an ethnic minority.
	Police forces that reflect the communities they serve are crucial to cutting crime in a modern diverse society. While the police workforce is more representative in terms of gender and ethnicity than it has ever been, the Government has been clear that there is still much more for the police to do to ensure better recruitment of officers from a minority ethnic background. The College of Policing and forces are working together to drive improvements in diversity in the police workforce.
	Number1 of police officers2, 3, 4 a and police community support officers5, 6 recruited toEngland and Wales, by ethnicity and joining type, 2010/11 to 2012/137,8
	
		
			 Police Officers 
			  2010/11 2011/12 2012/13 
			  White All minority ethnic Not stated Total % minority ethnic White All minority ethnic Not stated Total % minority ethnic White All minority ethnic Not stated Total % minority ethnic 
			 Police Standard Direct Recruit 1,270 90 7 1,366 6.6% 1,439 215 9 1,663 12.9% 1,266 55 13 1.334 4.1% 
			 Police - Previously Special Constable 88 5 0 93 5.4% 342 38 5 385 9.9% 378 41 0 419 9.8% 
			 Police rejoining 59 1 0 60 1.7% 61 3 0 64 4.7% 50 1 1 52 1.9% 
			 Total 1,416 96 7 1,519 6.3% 1,842 256 14 2,112 12.1% 1,694 97 14 1,805 5.4% 
		
	
	
		
			 PCSOs 
			  2010/11 2011/12 2012/13 
			  White All minority ethnic Not stated Total % minority ethnic White All minority ethnic Not stated Total % minority ethnic White All minority ethnic Not stated Total % minority ethnic 
			 Police Staff Standard 366 19 9 394 4.8% 505 32 21 558 5.7% 1,144 101 77 1,321 7.6% 
			 Police Staff Rejoining 5 0 0 5 0.0% 13 0 0 13 0,0% 9 0 0 9 0.0% 
			 Total 371 19 9 399 4.8% 517 32 21 570 5.6% 1,153 101 77 1,330 7.6% 
		
	
	1
	. This table contains full-time equivalent (FTE) figures that have been presented to the nearest whole number.
	2
	. Police standard direct recruit includes special constables joining as a police officer and are recorded under this category if they have not been a special constable for a year or more.
	3
	. Police-previously special constables includes special constables joining as a police officer if they have been a special constable within the last year. Includes special constables joining from another force as a police officer.
	4
	. Police rejoining includes any officers who leave and then rejoin under the 30+ PLUS scheme and includes officers who left the force in order to join SOCA but have now rejoined. This excludes officers who are returning from a period of long-term absence or secondment
	5
	. Police staff standard includes individuals joining the police force for the first time and excludes police staff transferring from non-Home Office forces.
	6
	. Police staff rejoining includes police staff who were previously employed by the police force but in order to join SOCA and have now rejoined. This excludes staff who are returning after a period of long-term absence or secondment.
	7
	.
	Source:
	Home Office via Annual Data Requirement (ADR 521). These figures are not regularly published and should be treated as provisional.
	8
	. Figures for police officer joiners, by police force area, rank and gender (including transfers) are published each year in Table 5 of 'Police Workforce, England and Wales' (previously titled 'Police Service Strength, England and Wales').

Prison and Young Offender Institution (Amendment) Rules 2013

Baroness Stern: To ask Her Majesty’s Government whether the Children's Commissioners for England and Wales have been consulted about the application to children of the Prison and Young Offender Institution (Amendment) Rules 2013.
	To ask Her Majesty’s Government whether children who have mental health difficulties will be excluded from the Prison and Young Offender Institution (Amendment) Rules 2013.
	To ask Her Majesty’s Government whether children who are being monitored for risk of self-harm and suicide will be excluded from the Prison and Young Offender Institution (Amendment) Rules 2013.
	To ask Her Majesty’s Government whether children who have special educational needs, including emotional and behavioural difficulties, will be excluded from the Prison and Young Offender Institution (Amendment) Rules 2013.

Lord Ahmad of Wimbledon: We have introduced changes to the Prison and YOI rules that enable Governors and Independent Adjudicators to order compensation from individuals in custody who intentionally cause damage to property or the fabric of the custodial institution. The imposition of a compensation order will always take into account the particular circumstances of the individual concerned and will never exceed the value of the damage caused. Young people who are at risk of harm, who have special educational needs or who have mental health difficulties will not be excluded from the requirement to pay compensation where they have damaged property or the fabric of the custodial institution, but Governors are obliged to consider each young person’s particular circumstances when considering the amount of compensation.
	The changes to the Prison and YOI rules are supported by a Prison Service Instruction (PSI 31/2013). Although the Children's Commissioner was not consulted on the development of these changes, which affect all offenders in custody, a review of the systems to incentivise and sanction young people in custody is underway and the Commissioner will be consulted on the development of that policy.

Prisons: Sexual Abuse

Lord Lester of Herne Hill: To ask Her Majesty’s Government what information they have about the extent of sexual abuse by prison staff.

Lord Ahmad of Wimbledon: The National Offender Management Service holds high level information centrally on staff who have been subject
	to disciplinary procedures. However, it is not possible to extract detailed information for disciplinary action taken as a result of allegations that are specific to sexual abuse.
	The National Offender Management Service is committed to dealing with all allegations of misconduct swiftly and robustly, including sexual abuse. The NOMS Conduct and Discipline Policy sets out the standards of behaviour that all staff are expected to maintain. Where these standards are found to have been breached the disciplinary process set out in the NOMS Conduct and Discipline policy is applied.

Public Bodies

Lord Dear: To ask Her Majesty’s Government to which public bodies the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs has appointed a chairman since May 2005; who was appointed in each case; and in which year each chairman was appointed.
	To ask Her Majesty’s Government to which of its public bodies the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs expects to appoint a new chairman between 2013 and 2020.

Lord De Mauley: The table below gives details of the appointment of Chairmen since May 2005.
	
		
			 Public Body Chair appointees and year of appointment 
			 Advisory Committee on Pesticides Professor Jon Ayres 2006 
			  Professor Gabrielle Hawksworth 2012 
			 Advisory Committee on Releases to the Environment Professor Rosemary Hailes 2013 
			 Agricultural Dwelling House Advisory Committees (ADHACs) and Agricultural Wages Committees (AWCs) Chairs of AWCs are appointed annually by the Committees themselves from the independent members appointed by the Secretary of State. Chairs of ADHACs are appointed on a case by case basis from a panel of members. The Enterprise and Regulatory Reform Act 2013 provides for the abolition of these Committees and we expect to abolish them before the end of this year. 
			 Agriculture and Horticulture Development Board John Bridge 2008 
			  John Godfrey 2011 
			 Consumer Council for Water Dame Yve Buckland 2005 
			 Covent Garden Market Authority Pam Alexander 2013 
			 Environment Agency The Rt. Hon. the Lord Smith of Finsbury 2008 
			 Food from Britain Lady Jay CBE 2006 
			 Forestry Commission Pamela Warhurst CBE 2010 
			  Sir Harry Studholme 2013 
		
	
	
		
			 Gangmasters Licensing Authority Paul Whitehouse 2005 
			  Margaret McKinley 2011 
			 Independent Agricultural Appeals Panel The Panel consists of a pool of three members from whom a Chair is drawn for each Panel meeting. 
			 Joint Nature Conservation Committee Dr Peter Bridgewater 2007 
			 Marine Management Organisation Rear Admiral Christopher Parry CBE, Chair-designate 2009 and Chair 2010 
			  Dr Derek Langslow, Acting Chair 2010 
			  Sir Bill Callaghan, 2011 
			 National Forest Company Dinah Nichols 2005 
			  Catherine Graham Harrison 2011 
			 Natural England Sir Martin Doughty 2006 
			  Poul Christensen CBE 2009 
			 Regional Flood Defence Committees (RFDCs) and Regional Flood and Coastal Committees (RFCCs) since 2005. RFCCs replaced RFDCs in 2011. Dr Michael Bateman – Southern RFDC 2005 
			  Robert Caudwell – Anglian (Northern) RFDC 2005 
			  Tim Farr – Severn Trent RFDC 2006 
			  Steve Wheatley – Anglian (Central) RFDC 2008 
			  Amanda Nobbs – Thames RFDC 2009 
			  Alan Lovell – Wessex RFDC 2009 
			  Derek Antrobus – North West RFDC 2010 
			  James Morrish – South West RFDC 2010 
			  Arthur Barker – Yorkshire RFDC 2010 
			  Paul Hayden – Anglian (Eastern) RFCC 2011 
			  Tim Farr – Trent RFCC 2012 
			  Dr Anne Wheeler – Severn and Wye RFCC 2012 
			  Dr Jonathan Hargreaves – Northumbria RFCC 2013 
			  Professor Robert Van de Noort – South West RFCC 2013 
			 Royal Botanic Gardens Kew Marcus Agius 2009 
			 Science Advisory Council Chris Gaskell 2008 
			  Chris Gilligan August 2011 
			 Sea Fish Industry Authority Andrew Dewar-Durie CBE 2005 
			  Charles Howeson 2007 
			  John Whitehead, Interim Chair 2010 
			  Elaine Hayes 2013 
			 Veterinary Products Committee Professor William J Reilly 2012 
			 Water Services Regulation Authority (OFWAT) Philip Fletcher 2006 
			  Jonson Cox 2012 
		
	
	The maximum any Chair can serve under the Commissioner for Public Appointments’ Code of Practice for Ministerial Appointments is ten years.
	I would expect there to be new Chair appointments to all of Defra’s public bodies between 2013 and 2020. However, some of our bodies are expected to be abolished as a result of public bodies' reform.

Railways: Network Capacity

Lord Kennedy of Southwark: To ask Her Majesty’s Government whether Network Rail has any plans to increase capacity on the railway lines at the Catford Loop.

Baroness Kramer: Network Rail has not advised the Department of any plans to enhance network capacity on the Catford Loop. However, from 2016/17, some Catford Loop services will be operated using the new high-capacity Thameslink rolling stock.

Republic of Ireland: Aids to Navigation

Lord Berkeley: To ask Her Majesty’s Government, further to the Written Answer by Baroness Kramer on 17 October (WA 107), on what date each briefing paper on the progress in achieving full domestic funding for the Commissioners of Irish Lights’ operations in the Republic of Ireland or associated issues was received by Department for Transport Ministers in 2012 and 2013.

Baroness Kramer: The Commissioners of Irish Lights remains on course to achieve domestic self-funding in the Republic of Ireland by 2015/16. Officials have provided a number of briefings, verbal and written, to Ministers to this end during 2012 and 2013.

Schools: Free Schools

Lord Kennedy of Southwark: To ask Her Majesty’s Government what are the differences in the inspection regimes for free schools compared to schools in other parts of the state sector.

Lord Nash: There are no differences in the inspection regime for free schools. They are inspected under the same Ofsted framework and against the same criteria as other types of school in the state sector.

Syria

Lord Laird: To ask Her Majesty’s Government how many asylum-seekers from Syria have been registered as arriving in the United Kingdom in each of the last twelve quarters; whether they have agreed with any international agency to take in Syrian refugees; and, if so, in what numbers.

Lord Taylor of Holbeach: Asylum applications from Syrians, received over the last 12 quarters can be found in the table below:
	
		
			 Year Quarter No. of Cases 
			 2010 3 30 
			 2010 4 40 
			 2011 1 31 
			 2011 2 46 
			 2011 3 129 
			 2011 4 149 
			 2012 1 155 
			 2012 2 175 
			 2012 3 326 
			 2012 4 331 
			 2013 1 325 
			 2013 2 373 
			 Total:  2,110 
		
	
	The UK has no plans to resettle Syrians.
	Instead, we are giving as much help as possible to people in the region. We are one of the highest international donors to the Syrian relief effort, with £500 million pledged so far, and are supporting the Regional Protection Programme, which provides help close to the country of origin.

UK Trade and Investment

Lord Bourne of Aberystwyth: To ask Her Majesty’s Government whether they monitor the work of UK Trade and Investment in (1) England, (2) Northern Ireland, (3) Scotland, and (4) Wales.

Lord Green of Hurstpierpoint: UK Trade and Investment (UKTI) uses an independent monitoring survey (the Performance and Impact Monitoring Survey, (PIMS) to measure the performance and impact of the support made available to companies across the whole of the UK. Performance monitoring of services provided by trade and investment bodies in Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland are a matter for the Devolved Administrations. Full results of UKTI’s surveys, and detailed discussions of the methodology, including the questions used to derive the measures, are published
	on the UKTI website at: http://www.ukti.gov.uk/uktihome/aboutukti/ourperformance/performanceimpactandmonitoringsurvey.html

Welsh Government: Taxation and Borrowing

Lord Bourne of Aberystwyth: To ask Her Majesty’s Government what plans they have to give borrowing powers to the Welsh Government.
	To ask Her Majesty’s Government what plans they have to give taxation powers to the Welsh Government.

Lord Deighton: The Government will respond to the Commission on Devolution in Wales, which recommended tax and borrowing powers for the Welsh Government, following an assessment of the submissions received to its consultation on the potential impacts of devolving stamp duty land tax.

Young Offender Institutions: Restraint

Baroness Stern: To ask Her Majesty’s Government how many use of force incidents have resulted in a child having a bone fracture in Hindley Young Offender Institution in each of the last five years; what was the reason for use of force in each of those incidents; whether the child in each incident was seen shortly after the incident by (1) a local authority social worker, (2) an independent advocate, and (3) a representative of the Youth Justice Board to review the child's safety and welfare; and whether any of those bodies published a subsequent report.

Lord Ahmad of Wimbledon: The safety of young people in custody is our highest priority. The behaviour of some young people is sometimes extremely challenging and can put the safety of other young people and staff at serious risk. The management of this behaviour is crucial to creating a safe environment for young people and staff.
	The Government is clear that restraint should only ever be used against young people as a last resort where it is absolutely necessary to do so and where no other form of intervention is possible or appropriate.
	All establishments holding young people have Restraint Minimisation Strategies in place to promote an establishment-wide commitment to minimising incidents of restraint.
	Since 2008 there have been four uses of force incidents in HMYOI Hindley that have resulted in bone breaks or fractures. There was one in 2009, two in 2010, and one in 2011. In two of the incidents force was used to gain compliance from the young person to ensure their safety and that of the staff involved. In the other
	two incidents force was used to prevent harm to others. In all cases the young person was seen by a local authority social worker, a child protection case was opened, and a local strategy meeting held to ensure correct procedures were followed. Only one of the young people requested support during his post-restraint debrief by an independent advocate. No reports were published by the persons above mentioned.
	In 2011 a young person was restrained and treated for a suspected fractured wrist, however after a number of fact finding investigations involving internal and external healthcare providers it was concluded that the young person had not received a fractured wrist during the restraint.

Young Offender Institutions: Restraint

Baroness Stern: To ask Her Majesty’s Government whether there is a child protection lead in the National Offender Management Service and the Youth Justice Board; and whether there is a senior post held by a social worker registered with the Health and Care Professions Council.

Lord Ahmad of Wimbledon: We are committed to ensuring the safety of young people in custody with specific procedures and designated points of contact in establishments on child protection matters.
	Within the National Offender Management Service, the Head of the Young People’s Group is a qualified social worker registered with the Health and Care Professions Council. Additionally, the section head within Young Peoples Group with strategic responsibility for safeguarding and child protection holds a social work qualification.
	Within the Youth Justice Board, the child protection lead is the ‘Head of Safeguarding and Child Protection’ team. There are no registered social workers in the Youth Justice Board Senior Management Team.

Young Offender Institutions: Restraint

Baroness Stern: To ask Her Majesty’s Government whether copies of CCTV film of a child being restrained in a young offender institution are routinely made available to the Youth Justice Board and the local authority when the restraint has resulted in a child having a bone fracture or any other serious injury.

Lord Ahmad of Wimbledon: The safety of young people is our highest priority. The Government is clear restraint should only ever be used against young people as a last resort where it is absolutely necessary to do so and where no other form of intervention is possible or appropriate. Use of restraint is closely monitored throughout the youth secure estate.
	CCTV footage is not routinely made available to the Youth Justice Board or Local Authority where restraint has resulted in a serious injury but is made available to them upon request, where available.
	After an incident of restraint in under-18 Young Offenders Institutions young people are medically assessed as soon after the incident as is practicable and there is
	a structured debrief with the young person to reduce the likelihood of future restraint incidents. Child protection procedures are initiated if a young person is injured and the level of harm meets the criteria agreed between each Young Offenders Institution and their Local Safeguarding Children's Board.

Young Offender Institutions: Restraint

Baroness Stern: To ask Her Majesty’s Government whether the emergency response belt has been authorised for use in young offender institutions holding juveniles and secure training centres; and, if so, on how many occasions it has been used in each of the last five years.

Lord Ahmad of Wimbledon: The safety of young people in custody is our highest priority.
	We are clear restraint should only ever be used against young people as a last resort where it is absolutely necessary to do so and where no other form of intervention is possible or appropriate.
	The emergency response belt has not been authorised for use in under-18 Young Offenders Institutions or Secure Training Centres.

Young Offender Institutions: Restraint

Baroness Stern: To ask Her Majesty’s Government how many complaints have been made by children in secure training centres to a governor or an independent person in each of the last five years; and how many of those complaints concerned the use of force.

Lord Ahmad of Wimbledon: The safety of young people in custody is our highest priority.
	We are clear restraint should only ever be used against young people as a last resort where it is absolutely necessary to do so and where no other form of intervention is possible or appropriate.
	The Government is committed to ensuring young people feel safe whilst in the care of the secure estate and to allow them every opportunity to make complaints if they feel they have not been treated appropriately.
	In addition to accessing internal grievance procedures, young people in Secure Training Centres (STC) can appeal to the STC Monitor if they are dissatisfied with the outcome of their complaint. We have recently extended the remit of the Prison and Probation Ombudsman to review complaints from young people in STCs. Young people in STCs also have access to independent advocates to assist them in resolving issues relating to their welfare and treatment.
	The table below shows the total number of complaints to an STC as reported by the four STCs.
	There has been a decline in the annual number of complaints from those recorded in 2008 to those recorded in 2012.
	
		
			  2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 
			 Overall number of complaints 1,178 835 968 903 835 
		
	
	
		
			 How many of these complaints related to physical restraint 58 65 79 72 58 
			 Physical restraint complaints % of overall complaints 5% 8% 8% 8% 7%

Young Offenders

Baroness Stern: To ask Her Majesty’s Government how many children were placed in custody (1) on remand, and (2) on sentence, at (a) the Magistrate's Court, and (b) the Crown Court, during the latest 12-month period for which figures are available, and during the preceding 12-month periods.

Lord Ahmad of Wimbledon: The total number of first time entrants to the youth justice system has been in steep decline over the last decade. Between 2011 and 2012 there has been a fall from 44,635 to 35,913. The average number of children detained in the youth secure estate has also fallen from 1,990 to 1,695 over the same period.
	Table one shows the number of children who were remanded in custody at magistrates' courts and at the Crown Court in England and Wales during 2011 and during 2012. The latter year’s data is the latest 12 month period for which figures are available.
	Table two shows the number of children who were sentenced to immediate custody at magistrates' courts and at the Crown Court in England and Wales during 2011 and during 2012. The latter year’s data is the latest 12 month period for which figures are available.
	Table two includes all children who were sentenced to immediate custody, irrespective of whether or not they were at any point remanded in custody. Similarly, not all defendants who are remanded in custody, and therefore counted in table one, will subsequently receive-custodial sentences.
	
		
			 Table 1: Juvenile(1) defendants remanded in custody(2) at magistrates' courts(e) and the Crown Court in England and Wales in 2011 and 2012 
			 England and WalesJuveniles 
			  Magistrates' courts(e)  The Crown Court(3)  
			  2011(4) 2012 2011 2012 
			 Remanded in custody(2) 2,595 1,845 1,236 932 
		
	
	(1) Juveniles are defined as those defendants who were aged 10 - 17 years old at the date of appearance in court.
	(2) Including those remanded in custody at any stage of proceedings at magistrates courts and the Crown Court who may also have been given bail at some stage of those proceedings. 10-11 year olds cannot be remanded to youth detention accommodation in the criminal courts under either the old or new remand frameworks. Under the new remand framework which came into force on 3 December 2012 a remand to
	“custody” could result in a remand to local authority accommodation (not secure) or a remand to youth detention accommodation (secure).
	(3) Some of the juveniles who were remanded in custody at magistrates' courts who subsequently went on to be committed for trial or sentence at the Crown Court may have been remanded in custody during proceedings at the Crown Court. Such defendants will therefore be counted twice in this table.
	(4) Previously published magistrates courts data for 2011 have been revised following the late receipt of a small number of court records relating to this period.
	(e) Data for magistrates' courts are estimated.
	Note:
	Every effort is made to ensure that the figures presented are accurate and complete. However, it is important to note that these data have been extracted from large administrative data systems generated by the courts. As a consequence, care should be taken to ensure data collection processes and their inevitable limitations are taken into account when those data are used.
	
		
			 Table 2: Juvenile(1) offenders sentenced to immediate custody at magistrates' courts and at the Crown Court, England and Wales, 2011 and 2012(2)(3) 
			  Magistrates' courts  Crown Court  
			  2011 2012 2011 2012 
			 Sentenced to immediate custody 3,035 2,127 1,170 958 
		
	
	(1) Juveniles are defined as those defendants who were aged 10 - 17 years old at the date of appearance in court.
	(2) The figures given in the table relate to persons for whom these offences were the principal offences for which they were dealt with. When a defendant has been found guilty of two or more offences it is the offence for which the heaviest penalty is imposed. Where the same disposal is imposed for two or more offences, the offence selected is the offence for which the statutory maximum penalty is the most severe.
	(3) Every effort is made to ensure that the figures presented are accurate and complete. However, it is important to note that these data have been extracted from large administrative data systems generated by the courts and police forces. As a consequence, care should be taken to ensure data collection processes and their inevitable limitations are taken into account when those data are used.

Young Offenders: Family Contact

Baroness Stern: To ask Her Majesty’s Government how many independent persons have been appointed by the directors of secure training centres since 1998 to visit and befriend a child who is not having contact with their family, in accordance with Rule 29(4) of the Secure Training Centre Rules 1998.

Lord Ahmad of Wimbledon: Since 2002, the Youth Justice Board has awarded contracts for Independent Advocacy services in Secure Training Centres (STCs) to ensure that each child has regular and frequent access to an independent person throughout their period in custody to assist and support them with issues relating to their well being and care. This service aims to meet the intention of Rule 29(4) of the STC Rules. The service is measured through indicators such as contact hours rather than individual appointments so it is not possible to specify how many independent persons have been appointed as part of past and current advocacy contracts.
	The advocacy provider, currently Barnardo’s, is required to publicise their service to young people within the establishments and make contact with them within a week of their arrival. All Barnardo’s staff working within STCs are thoroughly vetted prior to appointment.
	No information is available on numbers of appointments of independent persons prior to 2002.

Young Offenders: Family Contact

Baroness Stern: To ask Her Majesty’s Government whether the National Offender Management Service or the Youth Justice Board have issued instructions or guidance to establishments detaining children about the importance of family contact and how the establishment should support such contact; and whether they will place a copy of any such guidance in the Library of the House.

Lord Ahmad of Wimbledon: The Government recognises the importance of young people maintaining contact with their family during custody to support welfare needs and improve chances of successful rehabilitation.
	The Youth Justice Board have issued a series of guidance documents entitled ‘Key Elements of Effective Practice (KEEP)’, one of which is on parenting. This guidance is used by secure establishments to assist with promoting positive contact and involvement of families of young people.
	The National Offenders Management Service Prison Service Instruction (PSI) 08/2012 – ‘Care and Management of Young People’, sets out that Governors of under-18 Young Offenders Institutions must make arrangements to promote positive contact and involvement of families of young people both during their period in custody and after release. PSI 08/2012 also sets out that young people must be provided with facilities to write, have access to telephones and be encouraged and assisted to maintain contact with their family.
	Copies of these documents are placed in the libraries of the Houses of Parliament.

Young Offenders: Restraint

Baroness Stern: To ask Her Majesty’s Government how many times (1) handcuffs, and (2) escort chains, were used on children by (a) escort providers transporting children to or from custodial settings, and (b) staff in custodial settings, during the latest 12-month period for which figures are available, and during the three preceding 12-month periods.

Lord Ahmad of Wimbledon: The safety of young people in custody is our highest priority. The Government is clear that restraint should only ever be used upon young people as a last resort where it is absolutely necessary to do so and where no other form of intervention is possible or appropriate. The application of ratchet handcuffs and escort chains must always be reasonable and proportionate.
	Handcuffs in the under-18 secure estate can be used:
	- by escort providers when transporting young people to custody from courts;- in custody when managing an incident of restraint;- when young people are being escorted outside of custody (for example, attending a hospital appointment).
	In establishments
	Secure Children’s Homes (SCHs)
	The YJB does not collect data on the handcuffs from SCHs, therefore no data is available to report for this sector. SCHs do not currently use handcuffs as part of restraint procedures.
	Secure Training Centres (STCs)
	The data in the table below relates to instances within STCs where handcuffs were used during restraint:
	
		
			 Table 1: Number of times handcuffs have been used for young people in STCs during restraint 
			 Number of uses of handcuffs 2013-14 commissioned places Oct 08 – Sep 09 Oct 09 – Sep 10 Oct 10 - Sep 11 Oct 11 – Sep 12 Oct 12 – Sep 13 
			 Hassockfield 58 8 10 21 2 23 
			 Medway 76 0 0 0 0 00 
			 Oakhill 80 0 0 0 0 00 
			 Rainsbrook 87 0 0 0 0 00 
			 Secure Training Centres Total 301 8 10 21 2 23 
		
	
	Young Offender Institutions (YOIs)
	The data in the table below relates to instances within under-18 YOIs where handcuffs are used during restraint:
	
		
			 Table 2: Number of times handcuffs have been used on offenders under 18 held in YOIs when managing an incident of restraint 
			 Establishment 2013-14 commissioned places1 Nov 09-Sep 10 Oct 10-Sep 11 Oct 11-Sep 12 Oct 12-Sep13 
			 Castington1 128 33
		
	
	
		
			 Cookham Wood 131 135 120 128 130 
			 Downview2 16  1 1 3 
			 Eastwood Park2 16  1 0 0 
			 Feltham 240  27 10 19 
			 Hindley 440 38 85 84 89 
			 Huntercombe1 270 25
			 New Hall2 9  0 1 1 
			 Parc 64 0 1 6 2 
			 Warren Hill 192 49 31 38 47 
			 Werrington 160 45 78 74 126 
			 Wetherby 396 55 102 83 71 
			 Grand Total  380 445 419 486 
		
	
	1
	Castington decommissioned April 2010. Huntercombe decommissioned July 2010
	2
	Downview decommissioned August 2013, Eastwood Park decommissioned July 2013, New Hall decommissioned July 2013
	Figures for the number of times handcuffs have been used on young people held in these establishments is not available prior to November 2009. It is not possible to provide figures for split-site YOIs (Downview, Eastwood Park, Feltham and New Hall) prior to October 2010 because handcuff data collated before October 2010 from split-sites was not separated out for young people and young adults.
	Werrington started taking remanded young people during the period November 12 - September 13 which may account for the increase in usage at that establishment. Ashfield re-roled from a juvenile establishment to an adult prison in July 2013 and historical data relating to the use of handcuffs is not readily available.
	Individual establishments are responsible for managing incidents as safely as possible, which may lead some to use handcuffs more than others. There may also be environmental factors that contribute to the use of handcuffs - for example the physical layout of units.
	Escorts
	Escorts - under-18 YOIs
	The Prison Escort and Custody Service (PECS) transports young people from court to under-18 YOIs, including those on split sites. Data on handcuff use during transport is not collated centrally. Assembling the information would involve scrutinising the records of all young people escorted during the period in question and this could not be done without incurring disproportionate cost.
	Escorts - SCHs/STCs
	Up to September 2012 Reliance operated a contract for escorting sentenced young people only to both SCHs and STCs. Since September 2012, Serco have operated a new escort contract which from December 2012 also included a requirement to escort young people who are remanded to STC’s and SCH’s.
	Prior to December 2012 young people remanded to STC’s and SCH’s were escorted under arrangements made by individual local authorities and there is no data available for the use of handcuffs for those arrangements.
	
		
			 Table 3: Available data on the number of times handcuffs have been used for escorting young people to and from court to SCHs and STCs. Data prior to December 2012 does not include those young people who were remanded to custody and were escorted using local authority arrangements. 
			 YJB Escort Providers Jan 10 – Sept 10 Oct 10 - Sep 11 Oct 11 - Sep 12* Oct 12 - Sep 13 
			 SCH/STC escorting handcuff use 29 366 298 702 
			 Number of escorts**   1739 3484 
			 Use of handcuffs as a percentage of escorts   17% 20% 
		
	
	* Data for August 2012 is not available.
	** Data on total number of escorts for periods prior to October 2011 is not available.
	Prior to September 2010, Reliance submitted data on the use of handcuffs only in response to incidents which occurred during the escort (i.e. in the vehicle). From September 2010, Reliance began recording all uses of handcuffs e.g. precautionary uses of handcuffs within the court or hospitals, or within the establishment when moving through insecure areas (usually at the direction of the court/establishment etc).
	As escort arrangements for young people remanded to STCs and SCHs were managed by local authorities prior to December 2012 no data is centrally available on these escorts before that date. From December 2012, Serco assumed responsibility for escorting young people remanded to STCs and SCHs and began reporting this data. The inclusion of remanded young people explains the increase in the number of times handcuffs were used in the period October 2012 to September 2013 although as a percentage of overall escorts the latest period is broadly comparable with the previous year.
	Escort chains
	Both PECS and under-18 YOIs can use escort chains in limited circumstances following individual risk assessments. Escort chains are not used in every instance where handcuffs are assessed as necessary.
	No data is collected centrally on the use of escort chains by PECS or by NOMS and therefore is not available to report without disproportionate cost.
	For young people being transported to/from STCs and SCHs under the Serco contract, escort chains are used for purposes of decency when a child or young person is handcuffed due to high levels of risk. Escort chains will be used on every occasion where a child or young person is handcuffed and has the need to use
	the toilet, and the toilet is not in the designated secure area. This is risk assessed by the Serco Escort Service staff and is likely to include hospitals or courts. There have been no uses of escort chains since the beginning of the contract from September 2012.
	All figures have been drawn from administrative IT systems, which, as with any large scale recording system, are subject to possible errors with data entry and processing and can be subject to change over time.